[Alleykat606]

(Original post by iSoftie)
**** ME!

O.O

So when will I have the chance to see the Turians or better yet Reapers?!?!!?!!!

mass relays?!?!?!?!?!

[pshewitt1]

(Original post by Hypocrism)
I won't believe it until I've seen the actual data. There have been scientific fads before in the media, and I will not fall for this one. Although, I would like it to be true!

yes because you are going to be able to interpret the data... my dad has a physics degree and was offered to work there and he still can't do that sort of stuff, Nothing to do with the media, CERN released it all with proof of findings..

[Cmmah]

(Original post by Julii92)
Sure is! Those faster than light neutrinos weren't too long ago either. I wonder if we'll hear about them again.

I think they were proven to be false, but I hate how everyone ridiculed those involved after it was proven wrong. Is there anything wrong with the occasional error? Isn't physics about making a hypothesis, which when tested, can be hit and miss? /going off on a tangent

No, I'm glad that I'm here to see the Higgs boson saga unfold. This is said to be the most significant step forward in Physics since the publishing of Einstein's Theory of Relativity. Stephen Hawking said that this would almost guarantee Higgs the Nobel Prize.

On another note, when it's been proven to exist, can we keep calling it the 'god' particle?

[cyfer]

Currently it is at 4.3 sigma. You need 5 sigma to confirm something (1 in a million for it being false).

So yeah most likely they will just confirm it once they layer more data on from ATLAS.

TBh though scientific theories have already been established around the Higgs Boson. Not much will change in my opinion (which is fairly limited)

NVM confirmed @ 4.9 sigma

[cyfer]

(Original post by Cmmah)
I think they were proven to be false, but I hate how everyone ridiculed those involved after it was proven wrong. Is there anything wrong with the occasional error? Isn't physics about making a hypothesis, which when tested, can be hit and miss? /going off on a tangent

No, I'm glad that I'm here to see the Higgs boson saga unfold. This is said to be the most significant step forward in Physics since the publishing of Einstein's Theory of Relativity. Stephen Hawking said that this would almost guarantee Higgs the Nobel Prize.

On another note, when it's been proven to exist, can we keep calling it the 'god' particle?

Good joke about the God particle

Yes it was proved false because the time it took for a certain connection to be made was miscalculated

This cannot be proven false if it is confirmed because it is from superimposing data. If you find one data piece to be inaccurate, that is just one in several thousand/hundred.

[tamimi]

My mate and I had a wager, we each suggested the eV at which HB is to be found. Whoever gets it right pays the other £1 per GeV.

I'm £125.30 richer, bitches.

[sconter]

(Original post by tamimi)
My mate and I had a wager, we each suggested the eV at which HB is to be found. Whoever gets it right pays the other £1 per eV.

I'm £125.30 richer, bitches.

u wot m8

[vedderfan94]

(Original post by Basil Brush)
But don't we already do that in nuclear fission?

No.

[Jamie66]

(Original post by tamimi)
My mate and I had a wager, we each suggested the eV at which HB is to be found. Whoever gets it right pays the other £1 per eV.

I'm £125.30 richer, bitches.

Its mass is measured in Giga eV, which means you're actually owed around £160,000,000,000 :P

[vedderfan94]

(Original post by tamimi)
My mate and I had a wager, we each suggested the eV at which HB is to be found. Whoever gets it right pays the other £1 per eV.

I'm £125.30 richer, bitches.

Actually, it was 125.3 GeV, which means you are £125.3 billion richer!

[Hypocrism]

(Original post by pshewitt1)
yes because you are going to be able to interpret the data... my dad has a physics degree and was offered to work there and he still can't do that sort of stuff, Nothing to do with the media, CERN released it all with proof of findings..

I can't interpret the data-I can look at the stats and see if the media is just taking a handful of measurements and trying to create a big story, though. It looks like they're not, with almost 5 sigma.

[CJKay]

(Original post by TheJ0ker)
No, if theoretically we could control them, we could change mass into energy and vice versa but you can't create something out of nothing.

Two things wrong with this:

1. We can already change mass into energy. In fact, mass already is energy, hence mass-energy and E=mc2.
2. The scientific definition of 'nothing' is not the layman's definition of 'nothing'. A scientific nothing is a vacuum, and a vacuum is susceptible to vacuum fluctuation, which is not a nothing.

[wibletg]

(Original post by TheJ0ker)
Yeah I suppose if you are talking about the mass defect of a nucleus, but it's not very efficient, this probably will never happen but if we controlled the higgs boson we could change say 1kg of matter completely into energy. This would release 9x10^16 J of energy and it wouldn't have to be radioactive matter either it could just be 1 kg of water...

Again it's probably just fanciful thinking.

Can I point out, we're not producing something with nothing with the mass defect of the nucleus - we're harnessing a decrease in potential energy (and thereby a mass decrease due to Einsteins' famous equation).

I have to say though, as much as this discovery is fantastic it REALLY annoys me reading BBC message boards etc and seeing people claim that this was all a 'huge waste' of money.

[tamimi]

(Original post by vedderfan94)
Actually, it was 125.3 GeV, which means you are £125.3 billion richer!

*per GeV. Honest Typo. I'll correct it now.

[tamimi]

(Original post by sconter)
u wot m8

I'm sorry, I don't speak Pineapple.

[Profesh]

Hopefully.

[Dirac Delta Function]

^^ that cat is wearing its bow tie on the back of its neck.

[chendry0911]

(Original post by Killuminati1989)
The Higgs Boson walks into a church

The priest says "What are u doing here"

Higgs Boson says "U cant have mass without me"

hahahahahahahaha

Hahaha nice 1


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

[mmmpie]

(Original post by CJKay)
Two things wrong with this:

1. We can already change mass into energy. In fact, mass already is energy, hence mass-energy and E=mc2.
2. The scientific definition of 'nothing' is not the layman's definition of 'nothing'. A scientific nothing is a vacuum, and a vacuum is susceptible to vacuum fluctuation, which is not a nothing.

I think he meant that at least some significant portion of the rest mass of a particle could be converted to usable energy. Matter-energy equivalence doesn't mean that mass and energy are the same thing in practice.

[TheJ0ker]

(Original post by CJKay)
Two things wrong with this:

1. We can already change mass into energy. In fact, mass already is energy, hence mass-energy and E=mc2.
2. The scientific definition of 'nothing' is not the layman's definition of 'nothing'. A scientific nothing is a vacuum, and a vacuum is susceptible to vacuum fluctuation, which is not a nothing.

We can change a kilo of mass into pure energy already? I don't think so.

I know the definition of a vaccum thanks...

(Original post by wibletg)
Can I point out, we're not producing something with nothing with the mass defect of the nucleus - we're harnessing a decrease in potential energy (and thereby a mass decrease due to Einsteins' famous equation).

I know. Never said we did.